so can we agree now the ps3 is more powerful?

One thing I will say though is that it doesn't say much for innovation when you have 2 diffferent archictectures and you end up with the same thing. IBM- "Here you go Sony. Here's yours and here's yours Microsoft. Have fun. We basically put different things in different places. Good luck finding them." They do the same thing.

Walker34

[QUOTE="Walker34"]

One thing I will say though is that it doesn't say much for innovation when you have 2 diffferent archictectures and you end up with the same thing. IBM- "Here you go Sony. Here's yours and here's yours Microsoft. Have fun. We basically put different things in different places. Good luck finding them." They do the same thing.

ronvalencia

Well thats the thing. From what i heard is they designed the chip for Sony first. Then microsoft wanted one. So for patent and legal reasons and that kind of stuff, they just moved stuff around and came up with the same thing for microsoft, with certain preferences and input in mind for each company obviously.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Walker34"]

One thing I will say though is that it doesn't say much for innovation when you have 2 diffferent archictectures and you end up with the same thing. IBM- "Here you go Sony. Here's yours and here's yours Microsoft. Have fun. We basically put different things in different places. Good luck finding them." They do the same thing.

Walker34

Well thats the thing. From what i heard is they designed the chip for Sony first. Then microsoft wanted one. So for patent and legal reasons and that kind of stuff, they just moved stuff around and came up with the same thing for microsoft, with certain preferences and input in mind for each company obviously.

If you notice, IBM and their AIB(Add-In-Board) partners attempts to enter PC's vector/streaming array processor market, which is largely dominated by NVIDIA and AMD/ATI.

[QUOTE="Walker34"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] Like AMD and Intel's treatment for DELL or HP or any other large PC OEM, IBM is interested in selling their processors to willing customers (with large bank accounts). Are you expecting PowerPC being exclusive to Sony? IBM prefers more ODM/OEMs adopting their processor products. IBM and NVIDIA can't survive just on Sony's purchases.ronvalencia

Well thats the thing. From what i heard is they designed the chip for Sony first. Then microsoft wanted one. So for patent and legal reasons and that kind of stuff, they just moved stuff around and came up with the same thing for microsoft, with certain preferences and input in mind for each company obviously.

If you notice, IBM and their AIB(Add-In-Board) partners attempts to enter PC's vector/streaming array processor market, which is largely dominated by NVIDIA and AMD/ATI.

weird. I didn't knwo they were doing that. Is that pricetag for real? So they are targetting large corporations with large server environments?

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Walker34"]

Well thats the thing. From what i heard is they designed the chip for Sony first. Then microsoft wanted one. So for patent and legal reasons and that kind of stuff, they just moved stuff around and came up with the same thing for microsoft, with certain preferences and input in mind for each company obviously.

If you notice, IBM and their AIB(Add-In-Board) partners attempts to enter PC's vector/streaming array processor market, which is largely dominated by NVIDIA and AMD/ATI.

weird. I didn't knwo they were doing that. Is that pricetag for real? So they are targetting large corporations with large server environments?

i think that the PS3 is slightly more powerful, but its really a draw between the two.

but ps3 beats 360 in graphics....lighting....physics...my point is...its not just one thing......i would say thats more then a little better.....Supa__Mario

lost planet 2 was running on a high end quad core pc in that footage. That's not 360 footage. I agree a quad core can match the ps3 but the 360 cant. If the 360 was a quad core with bluray i wouldnt be saying this, but it isnt. I think thats' pretty much the difference.

Walker34

Blu-Ray has nothing to do with graphical quality. =\

If Xbox 360 had a quad core, then it would kick the PS3's ass by 50 miles, not "match" it LMAO. Any decent processor destroys the stupid cell that everyone thinks is so awesome because it has 8 cores.

If Xbox 360 had a quad core, then it would kick the PS3's ass by 50 miles, not "match" it LMAO. Any decent processor destroys the stupid cell that everyone thinks is so awesome because it has 8 cores.

Hanass

For some reason I think you are exaggerating. Probably because you are.

As it has been confirmed countless times, both consoles are in essence equal.

As it has been confirmed countless times, both consoles are in essence equal.HOMIE_G64

It has. However, the Blu-Ray disc can hold better looking textures and more detailed wireframe which could give PS3 an advantage, depending on the game.

Slower disk read rate.

power > games!!!! LOL!

Riverwolf007

troll begone.